On 11/4/06, Carrol Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is it possible to build a strong and effective mass left movement (for
either reform or revolution) within an imperialist hegemon (i.e., the
U.S.) so long as that hegemony is maintained? Why? Why not?
Note: Except for the slight wobble introduced by the civil rights
movement (and the derivative anti-war movement) the trend in the u.s.
(in both parties) has been steadily to the right since 1938.
If the US weren't an empire, voting for Democrats as the lesser evil
would be like voting for the Liberal Party (or even the NDP if Greg
Albo, Sam Gindin, etc. are correct as I think they are) in Canada, the
Olive Tree in Italy, the Socialist Party in France, the Socialist
Party in Spain, etc. Such parties can be problems for leftists for
they can vote to have their countries remain junior members of the
multinational empire and take part in minor military campaigns and
other interventions for its defense. But voting for Democrats means
voting for major actions by the leader of the empire.
And yet, electoralism remains strong, so abstention from elections is
not a realistic option in relatively quiet times like this, and middle
strata of all critical sectors -- Blacks, Latinos, Women, GLBT people,
the disabled, immigrants, etc. -- still do benefit from and support
the Democratic Party. So, rejecting the Democratic Party marginalizes
leftists, as Bill Fletcher, Stan Goff, Julio, Marvin, etc. have
argued.
Anti-imperialists in the USA are between a rock and a hard place.
--
Yoshie
<http://montages.blogspot.com/>
<http://mrzine.org>
<http://monthlyreview.org/>
